Thank you for the interesting comments. But...frobozz brings up a thought that I would greatly appreciated being expounded upon: the quality control issue.

Is there anyone out there 'in the know' who can answer this question definitively? It is true that with still film there is no opportunity for compromise with quality control but, at least intuitively, it does seem to me that with 24 frames running per second and with the 'persistence of vision' coming into play here, that there would not be the same obsessive need for perfection in every frame with cine film. Or, instead, is the state of art of film manufacture so refined today that that simply is not an issue: that cine film really is as perfect as still film.

I am not concerned with 'slow speed' (lasts longer at room temp!) or 'weird curves' (that could be downright fascinating). I am concerned with being able to develop this film in normal B&W developers and achieve very sharp, low grain images with adequate contrast.

Gerand Koch: are you saying that type 2302 no longer exists and that only 5222 does? - David Lyga

Duncan,
I know what You mean, but there are other companies in Europe, Russia, China, besides Kodak, Ilford and Fuji who offer great materials at reasonable prices.
Dealing with 1000ft in the darkroom is fun and makes You take Your art seriously, instead of buying a prepackaged cartridge like a sissy from the store

David, at least for 5222, the quality has always been top grade, no defects.
I distill my water with steam distiller and every aspect of the dark room process is running in tight tolerances over here.
The only film I've come across and have no doubts had defects was Foma.

Gerand Koch: are you saying that type 2302 no longer exists and that only 5222 does? - David Lyga

I was speaking only about Kodak negative cine films.

Eastman 2302 is designed for making prints from negative cine films. It is only blue sensitive and very slow, in fact Kodak does not even give an ISO speed for it. It is really not suitable for camera use.

If you want a Kodak/Eastman cine film you have only one choice and it is 5222. You may still be able to find some Easman Plus-X 5231 but it is no longer being made by kodak. Quality control on Easman films is excellent. A plus is that the Estar base will not curl and negatives are completely flat in the enlarger carrier. They also have an antiscratch and antistatic layer above the emulsion.

A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

Thank you for the interesting comments. But...frobozz brings up a thought that I would greatly appreciated being expounded upon: the quality control issue.

Is there anyone out there 'in the know' who can answer this question definitively? It is true that with still film there is no opportunity for compromise with quality control but, at least intuitively, it does seem to me that with 24 frames running per second and with the 'persistence of vision' coming into play here, that there would not be the same obsessive need for perfection in every frame with cine film. Or, instead, is the state of art of film manufacture so refined today that that simply is not an issue: that cine film really is as perfect as still film.

I hate to even bring it up, since I don't want to impugn Kodak's reputation... and I'll repeat that the only film I saw this on was SO-291, which is uniquely designed to be used for stuff where defects are inconsequential. But it's something to watch out for. IN my case it was easy to work around simply because the defects went on so glaringly and for so many feet. As I was cutting off one bulk loaded 35mm cart, I noticed the gouges in the base side. So I started just pulling film out of the bulk loader... it was 15 or 20 feet before they stopped. Then the film was smooth as silk again. I found one more area like that another cartridge or two farther along, and then never again. And so far no problems at all with the 2360 I bought new. (My understanding of how this stuff works is that SO-291 was an earlier version of the product, available by "Special Order" and then when they finally released as a fully stocked product in the catalog they gave it a proper model number, which was 5360/2360, because it's definitely the exact same stuff.) So its prototype nature might be yet another reason they wouldn't care so much about defects in it.

Originally Posted by David Lyga

Gerand Koch: are you saying that type 2302 no longer exists and that only 5222 does? - David Lyga

I think he meant that 5222 is the last B&W camera negative that Kodak sells in 35mm. They still make 2302 but it's a print film.

Eastman 2302 is designed for making prints from negative cine films. It is only blue sensitive and very slow, in fact Kodak does not even give an ISO speed for it. It is really not suitable for camera use.

Well, one man's "not suitable for camera use" is another man's "look at the cool weird film I managed to make images on!" I'm of the opinion that anything 35mm wide and with sprocket holes is potentially suitable for camera use :-) At least until proven otherwise. As long as one is aware of the long list of differences between these and off-the shelf camera films, I think they can have their uses.

That's interesting.
I think I read somewhere there can be problem with the perforation, as if cinema had a slightly different standard so that the holes of movies 35mm do not necessarily coincide with the holes of a 35mm film intended for a still camera.

Was it just a bad dream?
Buying movie film in bulk would certainly mean a great saving.

Well, one man's "not suitable for camera use" is another man's "look at the cool weird film I managed to make images on!" I'm of the opinion that anything 35mm wide and with sprocket holes is potentially suitable for camera use :-) At least until proven otherwise. As long as one is aware of the long list of differences between these and off-the shelf camera films, I think they can have their uses.

Duncan

Eastman 2302 is designed for contact printing cine negative film to obtain production prints. Therefore it doesn't even have to be orthochromatic in sensitivity. A very intense light source is used. I seem to remember that cine positive films have an estimated ISO speed of ~0.6, yes you read correctly less than ISO 1!!. You will be faced with VERY LONG exposures. I personally am not that masochistic. Remember the OP will be buying this film. If one got it for free it might be interesting to play with.

Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 04-27-2012 at 04:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.

A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

That's interesting.
I think I read somewhere there can be problem with the perforation, as if cinema had a slightly different standard so that the holes of movies 35mm do not necessarily coincide with the holes of a 35mm film intended for a still camera.

Was it just a bad dream?
Buying movie film in bulk would certainly mean a great saving.

Fabrizio

The shape of the perf hole is slightly different but no troubles in any of the cameras I use. There is another thread here on APUG using Orwo films which use the cine perf (the true designated name skips my mind) and this B&W negative film also reversal processes really well.